Prosecution Insights
Prosecution Insights
Technology area: Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering
2 pending office actions • 1 art units • 2 examiners • 0 of 2 (0%) have an AI response strategy ready • 1 patents granted in the last 365 days
Sceneray Co. Ltd. has 4 pending office actions in the Medical Devices & Mechanical Engineering technology area. These cases are distributed among 4 distinct examiners but are all contained within 1 distinct art unit. This concentration in a single art unit suggests a very specific technical focus for the portfolio. The busiest examiner is KNAUSS, CHRISTIAN D, who is responsible for 1 pending office action.
While the 1 distinct art unit provides a consistent administrative environment, the use of 4 distinct examiners means that practitioners will encounter four different subjective viewpoints. Each of the 4 pending office actions must be prosecuted with an eye toward the individual examiner's preferences. The fact that all 4 pending office actions are in the same art unit may allow for some informal coordination, but the primary challenge remains the 4 distinct examiners. Practitioners should leverage the technical consistency of the 1 distinct art unit to build a strong foundation for the 4 pending office actions.
Based on the USPTO statutory response window for each pending office action. 1 of the docket's apps have a known mailing date; the rest are excluded from the tile counts.
Difficulty is derived from the rejection statutes on the most recent pending office action. §101-driven and multi-statute cases are graded Hard; §112-only and obviousness-type double-patenting cases are graded Easy; everything else is Medium. "Unknown" means we have not yet parsed a statute for that office action.
| Bucket | Cases |
|---|---|
| §103 only | 1 (50%) |
| §102 only | 1 (50%) |
How the docket's pending cases split across USPTO tech-center bands.
Manual office-action response work runs about 10 hours per case. The time-saved bands below show what IP Author's prosecution pipeline typically delivers — a conservative 20% on the low end, 35% in the middle, 50% on the high end.
| Examiner | Apps on this docket | Allow rate | Interview lift |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAVUSDIPHOL, PAULTEP | 1 | 76.9% | +17.0% |
| WEBSTER, KARMEL JOHANNA | 1 | 68.0% | +28.7% |
Cases in front of an examiner whose interview lift is 10 percentage points or more — i.e. interviewed cases historically resolve more favorably than non-interviewed ones. The top 2 ordered by deadline are shown.
| App # | Title | Examiner | Due in |
|---|---|---|---|
| 17215632 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR NEURO-STIMULATION | WEBSTER, KARMEL JOHANNA | 79d |
| 18282757 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING A BRAIN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | SAVUSDIPHOL, PAULTEP | — |
| Art Unit | Apps |
|---|---|
| 3792 | 1 |
| App # | Title | Examiner | Art Unit | Statutes | Status | Due in | AI | Filed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18282757 | METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING A BRAIN ELECTRICAL SIGNAL, AND STORAGE MEDIUM | SAVUSDIPHOL, PAULTEP | — | §102 | Non-Final OA | — | Pending | Sep 18, 2023 |
| 17215632 | METHOD AND DEVICE FOR NEURO-STIMULATION | WEBSTER, KARMEL JOHANNA | 3792 | §103 | Final Rejection | 79d | Pending | Mar 29, 2021 |
IP Author helps IP teams respond to office actions faster with AI-generated responses, examiner analytics, and prosecution intelligence.
Start Free Trial